Is CBI Director Ranjit Sinha acting as a gatekeeper for decisions of his officers?

Those close to Sinha say he is no rubber stamp and is acting as a gatekeeper for decisions of CBI officers. Former CBI Director D. R. Kaarthikeyan says CBI Director has the authority to take a final call.

NEW DELHI: CBI director Ranjit Sinha seemed the lone dissenter when the file on the politically explosive Aircel-Maxis deal landed at his table in November last year, carrying a rather unanimous opinion of the probe team members that the case was fit for a charge-sheet against the former telecom minister and senior DMK leader Dayanidhi Maran.

Sinha was concerned about some "weaknesses" in the prosecutable evidence listed by the team itself - Malaysia was not cooperating in parting with any information and the matter had already been settled in an international arbitration. But also on his mind was the political sensitivity of prosecuting a weak case against a key member of the Congress-led ruling alliance.

The CBI director was wiser from the goof-up in March 2013 when no less than the then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had to express regret after the agency conducted raids at the house of DMK leader MK Stalin to recover an allegedly smuggled car. Sinha decided to play it safe and referred the matter to then Attorney General (AG) GE Vahanvati. The response came only nine months later, with the new AG Mukul Rohtagi saying recently that the evidence is rock solid. This is not the only occasion when important cases handled by the CBI have taken a new or rather unpredictable turn after reaching Sinha's table for a final call.

While Sinha cited shaky evidence to prompt a rethink in the Aircel-Maxis matter, he cited "preponderance of circumstantial evidence" to sign on a charge-sheet against Lt General Tejinder Singh last week for allegedly offering a bribe to former Army Chief and now BJP Minister General VK Singh.

Many CBI officials have in private termed the proof against Tejinder Singh "unreliable" and there were deep divisions within the probe team over charging him. Sinha himself admitted to ET last week that it was "not a fool-proof case." But the way the CBI has always worked, officers can record their option but the agency chief always has the final call.

The Supreme Court changed that in the coal scam, though, after differences between the probe team and the director came to the fore before the court. Over the past six months, Sinha signed off on closures of nearly 250 Preliminary Enquiries (PEs) in the coal scam, some of which were recommended for conversion into First Information Reports (FIRs) by the probe team. The Central Vigilance Commission, vetting all these closures on SC's direction, has already overruled Sinha in 14 such cases, asking the CBI to lodge FIRs in them while vetting of 180 more PEs is still on.

Sinha has challenges this before the Supreme Court, saying the CVC has not assigned any reason why at least 12 PEs should be converted to FIRs while he had given reasons to close them. Sinha is also dead against the CVC vetting the CBI's decisions on any FIR.

Those close to Sinha say he is no rubber stamp and is acting as a gatekeeper for decisions of CBI officers. Former CBI Director D. R. Kaarthikeyan says CBI Director has the authority to take a final call.